Ae you soured on bevel up?

[Prashun Patel]

I have owned three veritas bevel up planes, the jack, and two smoothers. They performed well, but i am beginning to think its just because they're made very well.

i also own a used, bailey bd jack with its orignal blade, and a bailey 7 that is stamped defective. I replaced the blade with a hock, and i have to say, i find these two planes much easier to use than any of the bevel ups. They both have horrible backlash, but they just tear out less than the bu's.

recently, bevel ups have become all the rage, and i fear i might have bought into the hype. But i am nit sure if my experience is just a fluke.

Do any of you find the same thing? I am thinking to trade all my bevel ups for bevel downs...

[David Dalzell]

I have the Veritas BU Smoother and I love it and use it quite often. I also use many different types of self made wooden planes and Baily 4, 5, and 7. Mainly it depends on what type of wood I am working with. For uncooperative grain of figured wood I usaully use either the Veritas BU Smoother of a 55 deg woody I made (Hock blade). Both work fine for these situations.

[Jim Koepke]

In my use the bevel up planes have places where they outperform the bevel down planes. This is mostly on end grain.

When planing straight non-swirling grain, the bevel down planes seem to give me a better result. This may be that most of my bevel down experience is with a "double iron" and the action of the chip breaker is creating less tear out.

My bevel up jack is the go to plane on the shooting board. Recently did a lot of shooting of 2X stock and had to use a Stanley/Bailey #6 for the extra width. This has me thinking of making a shooting board with a thinner platform to allow my LA BU Jack to reach the extra thickness of the 2X stock.

The backlash on my planes doesn't bother me enough to invest what it takes to cure it, i.e. buying new LN planes. I am so used to my planes' backlash to the extent that the LN plane without any backlash is a trifle annoying when used.

I doubt you would want to trade for any of my old Baileys. I would likely just sell them off to buy some more old Baileys.

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

Personal preference, work habits and all that. BU has its moments, but ninety percent of the time I prefer BD. I find Bd easier to sharpen to the slight cambers I like and advantageous in adjusting depth on the fly.

[Chris Griggs]

I love my LA Jack and while I bought it for shooting use it for all sorts of things, but the extent to which I use to for things other than shooting I would attribute to a) it being the nicest bench plane I own and b) it being out a lot already because I shoot a lot. Its a lovely lovely tool, but generally speaking prefer bevel down planes, and I prefer using chipbreakers (as opposes to high attack angles) to remove/prevent tearout.

There is something very nice about the simplicity and low center of gravity of the BU planes, but still I'd choose BD over BU 99% of the time. Shooting is really the only place I definitely prefer BU planes over BD and this is really only because the lack of a frog makes them easier to grip.

(There are definitely folks who prefer BU most the time. For instance, I predict Winton will be along shortly to write a 6 page post with pictures of him planing purple heart and bubinga with his LV BU smoother ...of course, Derek loves him some BU action too, but his water also spins in the opposite direction when he flushes the toilet, so I'm not sure I'd trust him)

[Graham Haydon]

I would like to try a BU but I have not found the need to buy one........yet :-). I think the Bailey concept is hard to beat but perhaps that's because I've been using one for 15 years and I'm very familiar with it.

[Tony Shea]

I have owned three veritas bevel up planes, the jack, and two smoothers. They performed well, but i am beginning to think its just because they're made very well.

i also own a used, bailey bd jack with its orignal blade, and a bailey 7 that is stamped defective. I replaced the blade with a hock, and i have to say, i find these two planes much easier to use than any of the bevel ups. They both have horrible backlash, but they just tear out less than the bu's.

recently, bevel ups have become all the rage, and i fear i might have bought into the hype. But i am nit sure if my experience is just a fluke.

Do any of you find the same thing? I am thinking to trade all my bevel ups for bevel downs...

I think much of your issue may be in not having the right bevel angle set up for reversing grain situations. The standard 25deg blade will def tear out a ton on reversing grain, your angle of attack will only equal 37deg. I use my BU jack plane a ton for squirelly grain with a 50deg blade installed. Sometimes I have to resort to the toothed blade on terrible grain that won't plane up in any situation. I do personally prefer BD planes but if I was already set up with LA planes then I would buy a few more 25* blades and hone different angle micro bevels to suit my needs.

There are times when I actually prefer the feel of my BU planes after a long session of planing with my Stanley's/LN's.

[Charles Bjorgen]

I'm a fan of BU planes and currently have three in addition to a few block planes. My most recent acquisition is the LV BU Jack that I found on a local Craigslist ad. It came with the PM-V11 cutter, the toothing blade and a 38 degree A-2 blade. A wonderful plane. Also have the LV BU Jointer, not much use yet, and the LN 164 that I bought way back in the 90's. After getting the BU Jack I sold a Stanley Sweetheart 62 (made in Mexico) plane that was surprising good considering the price and general negative views about that line. I used that for shooting as well as regular work. But I still like and use the regular Stanley types too.

[Malcolm Schweizer]

Hello Prashun,

What angle blade did you use? If you were using the 25 degree blade then perhaps that is why you got the tear-out. A higher angle like the 38 or 50 degree blade, in proper circumstances, would give less tear-out. That's the short version of the story.

I own the Veritas jointer, jack, smoother, and shooting plane in the LA series. I much prefer them. I have all the basic bevel down planes: 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7- mostly corrugated, as well as a bronze LN no 2 that I love. After trying the bevel up I was hooked. The reasons I love the bevel up are as follows:

• No chip breaker to mess with
• easy blade changes
• one plane plus four blades gives you the equivalent of four planes
• Less "fussy" to set up than a high angle
• less expensive!

I was ever skeptical, but after trying bevel up I have not used my bevel down planes since. I will likely use the No 2 when making wood surfboards because of the size and it works well on lightly curved surfaces. I plan to take the Stanley/Bailey's out now and then to give them some love.

[Shawn Pixley]

Jim,

I tend to work like you do bevel up for block plane and end grain work. Bevel down for the rest. I have a mix of Baileys and a couple LN. I don't care for the LV handles as much. Maybe my bench height.

[Winton Applegate]

am i soured on bevel ups ?

Hell No !

I am thinking to trade all my bevel ups for bevel downs

Get help.
Professional help.
Don't suffer alone.
( at least get this and study it as if your life and your sanity depend on it)
http://www.finewoodworking.com/how-t...ock-plane.aspx
(because they do)

[Randy Karst]

Just my 2 cents: I'm particularly fond of my LN low angle jack for some tasks; and to a somewhat lesser degree my LV bevel up smoother which is great on difficult grain. Most often however, I utilize my bevel down planes and prefer the finish they leave behind. I see the bevel up planes as specialty planes and nice to have in the line-up when you need 'em.

[Derek Cohen]

To be blunt, if you are working with softer, straight grained woods, then just about any plane with a sharp blade will work reasonably. Even then there is room for improvement - the better the stability of the blade the less likelihood of chatter and the better the surface quality. If this is the severest test you are likely to put a handplane to, then any modern plane (such as LV, LN, Clifton, etc. etc) is going to be perform the same as a cheap, vintage plane (such as an unfettled and detuned Stanley).

I think that anyone who says they get a better surface quality for a BU or a BD plane when all other factors are held the same (namely cutting angle, sharpness, blade stability, and wood type) is talking through their hat. As Rob Lee is fond of saying, "The wood cannot tell the difference".

When the wood becomes more complex, that is, the grain is increasingly interlocked and its hardness rises, the gloves come off and the quality of a plane and its user is better put to the test. It is difficult to subtract the user from the plane since there are techniques of set up that extend the abilities of most planes. An example of this is the use of the chipbreaker with BD planes to control tearout. Another may be the use of wax on the plane's sole.

If one were considering BU and BD for their working properties, one really needs to see this in the proper context. Are you exploring their performance capability on interlocked wood? Are you looking at the range of cutting angles they are able to achieve? Are you looking for ease of set up, blade sharpening, comfort when pushed on hard and interlocked wood? Do you prefer the looks of one over another (one must like the tools one has, for whatever reason)?

I use more BD planes than BU when you take into account the varieties involved. I often use woodies, many of which I build, and these are BD. I have both BD and BU metal planes, probably in equal numbers.

A serious consideration in my handplane use has been the conscious minimisation of tearout since the woods I use are highly interlocked. For my purpose, then, higher cutting angles have been a priority. In metal planes this was much easier to achieve with a BU plane, since the cutting angle comes from a secondary bevel rather than the bed angle, as in a BD plane. I do have a few high angle BD planes, but these introduce a second factor - the angle of effort at which the plane is pushed. Generally BD planes are much harder to push than BU planes (with a low centre of effort) when they are set with high cutting angles (such as 55 degrees and greater). There are BD planes with a lower centre of effort, such as the Malaysian-based woody design of HNT Gordon, and Japanese planes. Razee woodies are designed in this direction. The difference between a traditional coffin smoother and a low slung Krenov smoother is dramatic.

Bottom line, on interlocked hard wood with a high cutting angle, a modern BU planes will be easy to set up and will produce a superior performance with minimum effort. A modern BD plane requires more attention to detail (it has a chipbreaker to set). The BU plane offers more feedback and is more agile. The latter is equalled by a low slung BD plane, such as a Krenov woodie.

Sharpening is a big issue for me. This may be a non-issue for others. The reason is that I prefer to freehand hone blades. With a BU plane the requirement is a micro secondary bevel to attain the desired cutting angle. If you wish to add in a camber, then you need to start with a low primary bevel (25 degrees) and use a honing guide for the secondary bevel. Accuracy is important here to ensure you are close to the desired cutting angle. I must admit that if I am in the middle of using the plane and the blade needs to be honed, I become impatient with the process of setting up the honing guide. With a BD plane it is a simpler matter of removing the blade, running it freehand over the media, and returning it the plane. In this area the BD plane wins, especially a single bevel type (no fiddly chipbreaker to set up), which means a high bed type. I do think personality cannot be excluded here .

So you see there are too many factors to be able to reduce the answer to a simple "BD" or "BU". They are all good when set up correctly.



The above only applies to smoothers or other handplanes where finish is important. These comments do not apply to handplanes they are for preparation of wood surfaces.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

Prashun, have you ever tried wooden planes in earnest? That'll give you another kick. The feel of using a wooden plane is just so much better then anything metal. I don't know about the Australian woods, but anything from the Northern hemisphere is no problem for a wooden plane. It glides effortlessly over the wood. I know you can put some wax on a metal plane, but it wears of quickly, and the wooden plane glides better anyway. A wooden plane with an lignum vitae sole is even better. The light weight of the wooden plane is a bonus too. Preparing large boards with wooden jacks and fores and jointers is less tiring. And they are cheap. Dirt cheap. Just bought a nice wooden smoother, made by one of the last independent planemakers in Rotterdam in the 19th century; 2 euros.

So, if you are in for something new, get something very old

[Brian Ashton]

Snip

Regards from Perth

Derek

In short… Unless you're working with those bloody awful australian woods (where their only good quality is their resistance to termites) either bevel up or bevel down will work just as well as each other.